AD 23 August 25, 2026 Ct. 446 SG CRM(A) 2322 of 2026 Allowed An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Ghola P.S. Case No.96 of 2026 dated 15.04.2026 under Sections 85/115(2)/316(2)/80/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of: Mafura @ Mafuja Bibi Mandal and others … petitioners Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das Mr. Dipendu Sarkar Ms. Deblina De … for the petitioners Mr. Kaustav Shome Ms. Sharmistha Das … for the State Mr. Das, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that there is an unexplained delay of almost four years in lodging the FIR and that the same is nothing but an afterthought. He further submits that the victim committed suicide after about seven years of marriage and contends that the presumption under Section 118 of the BSA is not attracted in the facts of the present case. According to him, the allegations levelled in the FIR against the accused persons, who are the parents-in-law and brother-in-law of the victim, are omnibus in nature and no specific overt act has been attributed to any of them. Referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported at (2022) 6 SCC 599, Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam and Others v. State of Bihar and Others, he submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court has cautioned that courts should be circumspect while 2 proceeding against the relatives of the husband in cases arising out of matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. It was further held that relatives of the husband ought not to be implicated on the basis of omnibus allegations in the absence of specific instances indicating their involvement in the alleged offence. He submits that the prosecution has failed to bring on record any material connecting the present accused persons with the alleged offence. He further submits that no material has been brought on record disclosing any specific incident or overt act attributable to the petitioners. From the FIR, it appears that the victim committed suicide at a rented house where she was residing with her husband. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, being the parents-in- law of the victim, were residing at Haringhata, whereas petitioner No. 3, being the brother-in-law of the victim and a school teacher, resides at Dakshin Dinajpur. In such circumstances, he submits that the petitioners may be extended the benefit of pre-arrest bail. Mr. Shome, learned counsel for the State, produces the memo of evidence, case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioners. Memo of evidence filed by the State is taken on record. It transpires from the post-mortem report that a non- continuous ligature mark was found on the neck of the victim, which prima facie indicates that the death was suicidal in nature. The FIR alleges that the victim committed suicide at a rented house situated at Ghola, North 24 Parganas, where she was residing with her husband. Admittedly, petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were residing at Haringhata, whereas petitioner No. 3 resides at Dakshin Dinajpur. 3 The allegations levelled against the present petitioners, who are relatives of the husband, are omnibus in nature, and no material disclosing any specific overt act attributable to any of the petitioners is forthcoming from the case diary. Taking note of these facts and keeping the proposition laid down in the decision of Kahkashan (supra), I am of the view that the privilege under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioners. In the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on the further conditions that the petitioner Nos.2 and 3 shall meet the investigating officer once a fortnight till submission of charge-sheet. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities. (Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)